IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


// 


,5.*% 


1.0 


I.I 


11.25 


1^  V2.8 

|50     *'^" 


Hi 


■  40 


2.2 
M 

1.8 


U    II  1.6 


P 


a 


/; 


/i 


7. 


:>:> 


>^ 


7 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


33  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


\ 


iV 


s? 


:\ 


\ 


lV 


6^ 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 


D 
D 


D 


D 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommagie 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur6e  et/ou  pelliculde 


I      I    Cover  title  missing/ 


Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


I      I    Coloured  maps/ 


Cartes  gdographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 


Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


0    Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli6  avec  d'autres  documents 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

Lareliure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout6es 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6x6  filmdes. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  supplimentaires: 


Thei 
to  th 


L'inrtitut  a  microfilmd  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mdthode  normale  de  filmage 
sort  indiqu^s  ci-dessous. 


I      I    Coloured  pages/ 


D 


y 


□ 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagdes 


□    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pellicul6es 


Thei 
poss 
of  th 
filmi 


Origi 

begii 

theli 

sion, 

othe 

first 

sion, 

or  ill 


Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  d6color6es,  tacheties  ou  piqudes 


□Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d6tach6es 

HShowthrough/ 
Transparence 


Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Quality  indgale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materia 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplimentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


[~~|    Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I      I    Includes  supplementary  material/ 

I      I    Only  edition  available/ 


Thei 
shall 
TINl 
whic 

Mapi 
diffe 
entir 
begii 
right 
requi 
meth 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  dt6  film^es  d  nouveau  de  fapon  6 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  filmd  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu6  ci-dessous. 


10X 

14X 

18X 

22X 

26X 

30X 

j/_ 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Nationai  Library  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  filmi  fut  reproduit  grAce  A  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Bibiiothdque  nationale  du  Canada 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin.  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  at 
de  la  nettetd  de  rexemplaire  film6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  —^'  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprim6e  sont  film6s  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'imprassion  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  fiimds  en  commen9ant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
fiimds  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  filmd  d  partir 
de  Tangle  supdrieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n6cessaire.  lies  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mdthode. 


;     :    1    ,     : 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

MB 


f' 


'I 


a^itit^f^i^n^jftmi'f-'ifmcssff"-'  — 


^'^i.^MffimamHr'f^  vlp>w^-;^i^6JBwiBP^^ft»«''»i^-^' '  '■'  *'  '^  iM«*«tfawMJ:ggiiH-'->ii'<yaaB,''i*™?^-^*^»*'--^'- ' """" 


SPEECH 


OF 


MB.  CUSHING.  OF  MASSACHUSETTS, 


*>»    TBS    CASK 


Of 


AI,EX&i\OEn  fflcLEOB. 


l-i 


i 


nsiiVEnED  jx 


»l 


THE    nouSE    OF   REPRESENTATIVES 


June  24  and  25,  1841. 


Uifl 


' 


'*i-t^H-t 


■Nf- 


WASHINGTON: 

»HI5T1!D  AT  THE  NATIOITAI,  I KTILLIOKirCKIl  OFF.cii. 
1841. 


W' 


V 


Thefc 

"Itesoh 
iiicompatih 
of  the  Uni 
Vork  for  a 
ther,  by  an 
understand 
House  copi 

Mr.  CL 

Mr.  Spi 

between  o 

ject  ofpul 

our  Gover 

God  forbic 

tion  of  nat 

foreign  reli 

verv  esseni 

Vol  VPS  an  i 

is  our  duty 

back  on   tl 

allude  to  ih 

public  inter 

day  ii!  this 

gentleman  f 

Wbat   is 

purposes,  ai 

does,  tliHi  pi 

manner  doe 

In  a  donu 

questions  an 

concussion  I 

of  the  State 

everdiscusse 

those  judges 

a  moment,  th 

istration  of  « 

Look,  in   I 

domestic  onl3 

tied?     Is  it  n 

said  in  this  H 

tieman  from  I 

result  from  tl 

are  to  be  ind 

thus  end  in  sli 

withstanding  \ 

not  on  a  sudc 

complaint  aga 

And  I  couli 

principles  of  ji 

He  lias  not  de 

itic  and  unwisi 


\ 


*f 


SPEECH 


The  folluwing  resolution,  ofleied  by  Mr.  Floyd,  being  under  consideration  : 

•«  Resolved,  That  the  President  of  the  United  States  be  requested  to  inform  this  House,  if  not 
incompatible  with  the  public  interest,  V/hciher  any  officer  of  the  Army,  or  the  Attorney  General 
of  the  United  States,  has,  since  the  4th  of  March  last,  been  directed  to  visit  the  State  of  New 
York  for  any  purpose  connected  with  the  imprisonment  or  trial  of  Alexander  McLeod,  and  whe- 
ther, by  any  Executive  measures  or  correspondence,  the  Britiiih  Government  has  been  given  to 
understand  that  Mr.  Mda'dd  will  be  released  or  surrendered,  and,  if  so,  to  communicate  to  this 
House  copies  of  the  instructions  to,  and  report  of,  such  oHioer :" — 

Mr.  CUSHING  aiidrf.'ss.'d  die  House  as  follows: 

Mr.  Speaker  :  It  is  customary  to  make  public,  from  time  to  time,  the  negotiations 
between  our  «)vvn  and  other  Governments;  and  those  negotiations  become  the  sub- 
ject of  public  debate  in  the  two  Houses  of  Consress.  This  publicity  of  all  the  acts  of 
our  Government  is  one  anioni;  its  fundamenlai  prinriples  and  its  greatest  blessings. 
God  forbid  that  1  shoidd,  on  this  or  on  any  other  occasion,  seek  to  prevent  examina- 
tion of  national  measures,  whether  they  relate  to  the  domestic  atVairs  or  to  the 
foreign  relations  of  the  country.  But  while  this  feature  of  our  institutions  is  of  their 
very  essence,  while  it  is  indispensable  to  our  national  liberties,  it  of  necessity  in- 
volves an  inconvenience  ;  and  I  state  it  as  an  inconvenience  merely,  and  which  it 
is  our  duty  frankly  to  accept,  and  to  accommodate  ourselves  to,  as  but  a  slight  draw- 
back on  the  blessings  of  civil  liberty  which  characterize  the  United  States.  I! 
allude  to  the  impolitic  introduction  into  the  debate  of  nuitters  which,  consulting  the 
public  interest  only,  it  would  have  been  better  to  omit ;  such  as  we  have  seen  to- 
day in  this  House,  and  of  which  improper  course  of  proceeding  the  speech  of  (he 
gentleman  tVom  Pennsylvaida  (Mr.  Ingkp.soll)  afTords  an  illustration. 

What  is  the  attitude  which  that  trentleman  assumes  1  Whilst  disclaiming  party 
purposes,  and  claiming,  as  he  does,  to  love  peace  for  itself,  and  professing,  as  he 
does,  that  peace  is  for  the  best  interests  of  otir  country,  at  what  time  and  in  what 
manner  does  he  raise  this  discussion  before  the  House] 

In  a  domestic  point  of  view,  look,  in  the  first  place,  at  the  fact  that  these  grave 
questions  are  liirown  into  the  arena  of  this  House,  to  be  made  the  foot-ball  of  party 
concussion  here,  when,  at  this  moment,  they  are  under  the  advisement  of  the  courts 
of  the  Slate  of  New  York.  Yes!  these  the  gravest  judicial  questions,  perhaps, 
ever  discussed  or  adjudged  in  t!iis  country,  are  now  being  weighed  in  the  breasts  of 
those  judges  who  are  shortly  to  give  their  decision  in  the  premises;  and  yet,  at  such 
a  moment,  they  are  to  be  debated  here,  as  a  matter  of  fault-finding  with  the  admin- 
istration of  our  Government. 

Look,  in  the  second  place,  at  the  immense  importance  of  the  subject,  not  in  its 
domestic  only,  but  also  in  its  foreign  relations.  Is  this  a  question  of  diplomacy  set- 
tled? Is  it  not  a  pending  question  1  And  is  there  not  a  probability  that  what  is 
said  in  this  House  may  disturb  and  obstruct  the  proper  settlement  of  it  1  The  gen- 
tleman from  Pennsylvania  avows  and  admits  that  a  pro  :ted  and  bloody  war  may 
result  from  the  present  state  of  things;  and  that,  if  crimination  and  recrimination 
are  to  be  indulged  in,  it  would  have  the  effect  of  inflaming  the  popular  mind,  and 
thus  end  in  shedding  the  blood  of  the  kindred  nations  of  Britain  and  America.  Not- 
withstanding which  view  of  things,  the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania  has  delivered, 
not  on  a  sudden  impulse,  but  by  premeditation  and  study,  an  elaborate  speech  of 
complaint  against  the  for?ign  policy  of  the  Government. 

And  I  could  not  but  marvel  to  perceive  that  he  is  not  content  to  question  the 
principles  of  law,  international  or  municipal,  as  received  by  the  Secretary  of  State. 
He  has  not  deemed  it  enough  to  argue  that  the  course  of  the  Government  is  impol- 
itic and  unwise.     He  is  not  satisfied  with  questioning,  by  insinuation  at  least,  the 


H-  5 


I    I 


l\ 


patriotism  of  ilif  Secit'diiy  <»r  Si;ii»'  iikI  (il;u:iii;(  William  Ht'mv  Harrison  md 
Jolin  TvN'i  oil  dill'  si.h',  ml  Dtiii.l  \\  I'li-lrr  mi  tin-  oiIh  r,  in  iliis  inainr.  [Jut  Ik; 
coniloscciids  to  criiicisi',  in  the  stvlcnfii  litriiuy  i"«'vi*>u,  ihi;  hiiM'iiaiM'  ol' tlu' fcfc  rr*- 
tarv's  despalclj.  And  what  is  iho  faidl  rnnifi  with  that  lanajuauf  ?  Why,  fotsooll., 
it  is  to  hr  condiMunpd  bL'cau>!P  ol  its  ;dhMM'd  floqiicncr.  That  is  to  say,  tin*  vry 
matclili  ss  Dower  ot'  lantunuf  hmiicht  to  liir  dcrrnco  ot'  tlio  United  Sialt*;,  hv  tlic 
Secretary,  is  )i''rvri<ol\  sfiz- d  upon.  Id  hf  the  >iiil)i»'cl  ot"  ifproacl.. 

I  pit!  it  to  the  caiidor  ot"  ilip  wiMiMrnnii  from  Pennsylvania  to  say  wlifllwr  iIi.n 
kind  o("  criticism  bo  not  disii)0(>iiii()ii>.  I  am  awari'  that  {\wrv  is  an  established  Ian 
giiage  of  diploinary — ditjuififd,  t\acf,  Cotnitl,  sonuuhat  gout  ral  and  reserved  in  its 
style,  and  alion  to  rhetorical  ornanie»il.  If",  in  speakin;;  nt'  iho  lieauty  ol"  lair 
guage  of  this  despatch,  of  its  irop»'»  and  tiqnrt'S,  the  ^'enili'niin  means  to  say  tiiere 
is  any  thinji  nndiplomatic,  any  tiling  of  nnmaidy  or  eflVminate  tieoanrp,  I  totally 
deny  the  jostice  of  his  (ii(ici>ini.  Noihiiifr  in  that  letter  can  «  xreeo  the  precision 
and  strenalh  td' tiie  |r«nyiiai_'e,  drawn  from  the  purest  wells  ofundetilcd  Enijlish,— 
nothing  can  exceed  the  manly  viijor  of  its  tone  and  diction,  except  the  b<»aiity  ot" 
tItoDght  and  patriotisnj  of  principle  which  kindle  in  evurv  sentence.  How  coidd  the 
gentleman  from  Pennsylvania  shut  his  eyes  to  this?  How  could  he  deaden  him«',!l 
to  all  perception  of  the  si)irit  (d  patri(»lism  which  runs  ihronuli  every  line  of  that 
despatch?  How,  stopping  .o  complain  oftho  excellence  of  the  ianpnase,  could  he 
keep  himself  insensible  to  the  nolilenrss  o\  the  thouuhi  of  ihose  passa^jes  of  the 
de»!patch  which,  though  censored  by  him,  havo  been  received  with  the  mest  enihu- 
siastic  applause  by  almost  the  universal  People  of  the  United  States  { 

Whatever  might  be  said  of  the  precise,  narrow,  naked  quesiien,  whether  tiie  instruc 
tions  to  Mr.  Crittenden  should  or  should  not  have  been  writtf  n ;  whatever  miuhl  l;e 
said  of  the  equally  narrow  questions  of  imernational  law  involved  in  the  demand  for 
the  release  of  McLeod,  the  last  thing  I  dre.imed  to  iiear  in  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States  was  this  elaboration  of  minute  criticism  on  the  language  of  that  despatch,  and 
of  such  criticism  redeenu^d  by  no  rocoi^niiion  of  the  palriotisn)  of  principle  which 
di»tinguishes  it.      Is  not  tills  unjustifiable  as  well  as  extraordinary  i 

But  I  have  dwelt  longer  than  I  had  intended  on  this  point ;  and  I  would  not  l.ave 
touched  it  at  all,  bui  for  the  indication  it  aftords  of  the  spirit  of  laull-findiug  whicli 
characterizes  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania. 

It  is  easy  to  finrl  fault  with  a  jiublic  despatch — to  take  it,  paragraph  by  para- 
graph, and  say  this  or  that  idea  might  have  been  expressed  otherwise;  thatiMi. 
Madison  or  Mr.  Monroe,  on  a  similar  occasion,  might  liave  used  difl'erent  lanL'tiagp. 
It  is  easy  for  an  acute,  ingenious,  practised  lawyc.-r  to  find  fault  with  the  lauguaue, 
the  law,  and  the  diplomacy  of  the  despatch  ;  but  it  is  nov«d  to  cwniplain  of  one  be- 
cause of  the  [ire-eminent  merit  of  its  composition. 

There  is  another  remarkable  thing  which  appears  on  the  very  surface  (d"  the 
speech  of  the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania.  The  point  from  which  he  starts,  and 
at  which  he  closes,  the  idea  which  he  again  and  again  presents  to  the  mind  is,  that 
in  tliis  desiiatcli  are  contained  the  seeds  of  war  between  the  U'nited  Slates  and 
Great  Britain.  Now  I,  for  one,  deprecate  a  war  between  the  United  States  and 
any  Government,  and  most  of  all  between  the  United  States  and  England  ;  but  in 
deprecating  this  I  declare,  as  I  have  again  and  again  done  before,  that  1  would  cavil 
with  FJ,ngland  to  the  thousandth  division  of  a  hair,  on  any  question  of  the  rights  or 
honor  of  the  United  States.  And  1  w^uld  do  so  not  oidy  because  she  is  our  com- 
petitor on  the  seas,  not  only  because  she  has  colonies  conterminous  with  our  country, 
but  for  the  very  cause  that  she  is  great,  strong,  and  powerful,  and  the  worthier  to 
be  the  antagonist  of  the  United  States;  and  for  these  reasons  I  would  meet  her 
with  the  spirit,  and  zeal,  and  feelings  which  become  the  descendants  of  the  men  of 
the  Revolution. 

When  1  look  around  me  to  inquire  from  what  quarter  these  remarks  come, 
calling  in  question  the  patriotism  and  spirit  of  the  fereign  policy  of  the  present  Ad- 
ministration, 1  am  astonished  to  see  that  ihey  proceed  from  a  friend  uf  the  last  Ad- 
laiojsiiatioti  and  opponent  of  the  present. 


I 


II 


I 


Ol 

I 


[Mr. 
part  of 

Ml.  ( 
ol'e\ei  V 
friend  o 
imputes 
he  laiini 
•inlike  ( 
previous 
'he  f'rieii 
not)  the 
Was  t 
Did    It   , 
for  repai 
conirar\ 
Mr.  A'i.n 
dental  qii 
Englamf 
ease  of i 

x\ay, 
to  me  lo 
macy. 
Stale,  Ity 
of  others, 
under  Ge 
ing  the  fir 
famous. 
And  is  it 
compel  us 
trove r.sy  bi 
vindication 
Mr.   Van   J 
Great  Brit 
American  i 
liistoiy  of  t 
did  not  Mr 
t'lte,  in  tha 
'he  Uniifid 
disastrous  I 
Stall's  ?      A 
it  infinitely 
tlie  United 
•ninisiraiioii 
interests — ii 
world  with  ; 
United  Sfati 
name  of  Air 
war,  as  we  I 
not  reach,  w 
the  last  time 
Nor  WH«  t 
which,  undei 
Administrati 
my  colleaguf 
ducted  the  fc 
fice  our  inter 
hands.     But 


*"^ 


para- 
;U  .Ml. 

in;  I  race. 
Olio  be- 

ot     ill!' 

lis,  ami 
is,  lliat 
tcs  and 
tes  and 
but  in 
"Id  cavil 
l^lits  or 
[r  com- 
lountry, 
lliier  10 
;v\  lier 
hnen  of 

come, 
Int  Ad- 

1st  Ad- 


[Mr.  Inueksum.  was  \\vrr  iindci^iiood  to  iiiliiii-iU  xmii'  liissfiii  ri()in  llit-  iatler 
part  ul  llx:  proposition.] 

.Mr.  Cu8iiiNu  conliniifd.  Weil,  ilit^  pietient  Administration  de^nvt-s  liit' support 
oleMMV^otHi  man  in  tlit;  coiintiy.  Diil,  at  any  r'lte,  tlie  loinarks  uunif  fioni  u 
fritMid  of  the  l.ist  Adiiiini^trniinn.  Yes  !  it  is  a  friend  of  the  last  Adminisiration  wlio 
iinputcii  to  till'  [)resL'iil  a  want  of  duo  Npiiit  towards  Groat  Britain,  and  cavils  at  what 
he  tauiiiiii^ly  calls  tlit;  coup  (Vessai  of"  a  new  fbreijin  Secretary  (  iitering  into  office, 
iinliko  (f  b(dievt;  llie  uenllciiiau  sani)  all  his  prcdccissiiis,  without  the  advantage  ot 
previous  irainiiii;  in  diplomacy.  Ami  u|)on  lliest.-  pcjinls  I  have  something  to  say  to 
ilie  friends  of  tlie  hist  Adniiiii^tration,  and  (whethi'i'  lliu  two  things  he  identical  or 
iiol)  the  members  of  the  [uesent  Opfioiition. 

Was  the  last  Administration  disiiiij^ui  ^hed  lor  its  zeal  in  this  particular  tliinj.' 1 
Did  it  prosfciilr  with  spirit  the  claim  ol  lli(?  United  iStaies  a-^ainst  (ireal  Britain 
for  reparation  uii  acioimi  4it"  ihi;  de.^iruclion  of"  the  Caroline?  Did  it  not,  on  the 
contrary,  allow  that  claim  .t(»  slumber  lor  three  years?  And,  for  aught  that  appears, 
Mr.  ^  an  Buren  would  liaxc  allow eii  it  (o  slumlter  to  thr  t  iid  of  tinte,  if  the  inci- 
dental  tpiesticin  iiivol\(d  in  MiLeod'-s  aiitsi  |pid  iiut  arisen,  and,  by  converting 
Englanil  into  the  claimanl  paiiy,  thus  compelled  him  to  re^umc  the  discussion  of  the 
case  of  ilic  Caroline. 

•Nay,  more,  the  L'eiiih man  I'lom  I'l  iiti^v  Ivaiii.i  has  enleriuiiipd  us  with  what  seems 
to  me  lo  be  very  Ci«piious  co  iHHfnt>  on  this  caujj  d^essal  of  Mr.  Webster  in  diplo- 
macy. He  is  (]uiti'  misiaki  II  in  sayiiij:  that  Mi.  Webiter  is  the  first  .Secretary  of 
Stale,  by  mai)\,  who  had  had  m.  previous  diplomatic  oxpi^rieiice.  To  say  nothing 
of  others,  what  diplomatic  training;  was  poss«vsM'd  by  the  Jirst  Sccrefari/  of  Stale 
under  GentMal  Jackson  ?  And  when  the  jnentleman  from  Pennsylvania  is  consider- 
ing the  first  great  negotiation  of  Mr.  Webster,  how  does  lie  ha|pen  lo  forget  the 
famous,  or  rallter  iiif"amous,  first  great  iMgoiiatit»n  undertaken  by  JMr.  Van  Buren  T 
And  is  it  11  )t  an  act  of  mere  madness,  on  the  part  of"  the  f"i  lends  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  to 
compel  us  to  compare  the  two?  Here  is  h  despatch  belbte  us  addiessed  in  a  con- 
troversy between  the  United  Slates  and  Great  Britain,  containing  one  of  th«)  ablest 
vindications  of  the  honor  and  integrity  of  the  United  Stales  that  ever  was  written. 
Mr.  Van  Buren  began,  also,  with  the  discussion  of  a  question  between  us  and 
Great  Britain.  And  in  what  s[)irit  1 — that  of  u  patiiot,  a  man  of  honor,  and  an 
American?  Is  not  that  despatch,  on  the  contrary,  a  monument  of  ignominy  in  the 
history  of  the  United  Slates?  Instead  of  maintaining  the  interests  of  this  country, 
did  not  Mr.  Van  Buren,  on  that  o(cii>ioii,  utterly  sacrifice  them?  Did  lie  not  dic- 
tate, in  that  despatch,  a  dispusiiion  of  the  great  question  of  the  colony  trade  between 
the  United  Stales  and  (ireat  Britain,  which,  from  that  time  to  tliis,  has  proved  most 
disastrous  in  its  effects  on  ihe  commercial  and  navigating  interests  of  the  United 
State's  ?  A.id  pernicious  as  was  the  object  of  the  despatch,  was  not  (he  spirit  of 
it  infinitely  worse?  In  which,  lor  the  first  time,  [larty  quarrels  of  the  People  of 
the  United  States  were  carried  into  our  foreign  afl'airs — in  which  a  preceding  Ad- 
minisiralion  was  impliedly  reproached  for  ilie  zeal  with  which  it  had  defended  our 
interests — in  which  it  was  pioclainied  that  the  new  Administration  started  in  the 
world  with  a  srt  purpose  of  concession  towards  Britain — in  which  the  honor  of  the 
United  Slates  was  laid  prostrate  at  the  foot  of  the  British  throne,  and  Hie  proud 
name  of  America,  to  sustain  which  our  fathers  had  carried  on  a  first  and  a  second 
war,  as  wu  nmy  have  to  do  a  third — that  glory  which  the  arms  of  our  enemy  could 
not  reach,  was,  in  this  trucklinii  despatch,  laid  low  for  the  first,  and,  I  trust  in  God, 
the  last  time,  before  the  lion  of  England. 

Nor  was  tnat  despatch  a  solitary  act — .1  was  the  true  inde.\  of  the  purposes 
which,  under  the  inspiration  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  characterized  the  policy  of  the  last 
Administration  toward  Great  Britain.  For  a  long  series  of  years,  prior  to  1829, 
my  colleague,  (Mr.  Adams,)  either  as  Secretary  of  State  or  as  President,  had  con- 
ducted the  foreign  negotiations  of  this  Government.  He  was  not  the  man  to  sacri- 
fice our  interests.  No  right  of  the  United  States  was  ever  impaired  or  lost  in  his 
hands.     But  the  moment  he  was  driven  from  power,  a  change  came  over  the  foreign 


fiolicv  of  die  coiinlrv-  Tlial  clitiiii  of  llu;  I  mu;d  Siatri  lo  coiiiiiicroiai  n'ciprocit) 
\s\[\t  Kiiizlant)  and  Ik'I  roloiiit's,  wiiio.li  lie  liuJ  xIi.huoiinIv  maintaiiu'd,  wa.s  abaii- 
(li»iK'(J  ai  oiicf.  Tlio  litlo  of  the  United  rSlau-s  lo  tin;  possession  of  the  vast  region 
watered  by  the  river  Coliiinbi.i,  which  Ik;  liad  defeiid-'d,  was  h'fl  to  its  fate,  and  for 
the  twelve  year>  that  en>i>ed  under  the  last  Adniinis.iation  not  a  dopatth  or  a  word 
was  addressed  to  Lnyland  on  the  siibjeii.  Mi.  Adams  had  been  pursuing  the  ri^hti 
of  the  United  Slates,  also,  on  the  lonu;  line  ot  disputed  boundary,  from  the  Neehish 
rapids,  at  the  loot  of  Lake  Superior,  noith  and  west  to  tin;  Rocky  mountains.  But 
that  question,  also,  Mr.  Van  Bureii  and  his  party  allowed  to  go  to  sleep  for  t«'n 
years,  until  they  wi-re  driven  to  take  it  up  by  a  resolution  which  I  ofl'erejl  in  this 
House.  And  then,  worst  of  all,  the  scries  of  blunders  and  concessions  made  during 
the  last  twelve  years  in  the  question  of  the  North«-'aslein  boundary — it  havint;  taken 
one-half  of  that  time  to  raise  up  the  question,  by  discussion  in  Congress  and  other- 
wiaP,  from  the  point  of  depression  lo  which  it  had  been  sunk  durinii  tlie  oilier  half  of  it 
by  the  im[)olicy  and  improvidence  of  the  then  Administration  ;  which  liad  too  much 
to  do  of  petty  party  warfare  to  jjivo  due  attention  to  hij^her  and  morr'  national  inte- 
rests. And  I  mii;ht  refer  to  other  great  i|uestions  which  mark,  in  the  same  way, 
the  spirit  n{  concession  towaids  Ln^lund  in  all  ihiKjis,  which  pervaded  the  foreign 
policy  of  the  last  Admini'lration  :  the  friends  «»f  which  come,  at  length,  to  he  seized 
with  a  spasin  ot  patiioiism  in  llii-  matter  just  when  tliey  beirin  to  be  an  Opposition. 
And  now  let  me  r.ddress  a  siiit;L'  consideiation  lu  the  members  of  the  Opposition, 
whether  friends  or  not  of  the  last  Administration,  in  reference  to  the  parly  tactics 
they  seem  disposed  to  pursue  on  the  questions  pending  between  the  United  Stales 
and  Gn.'al  Brilaii-i.  It  is  inqjossible  not  to  ohsei  vc  ilie  course  this  thing  is  about  lo 
take.  Whether  we  read  ihe  newspapers  of  tie;  Opposition  or  observe  the  discus- 
sions in  Congress,  it  is  alike  apparent  that  they  aie  undertaking  to  stimulate  a  war 
feeling  in  tlie  United  States  in  the  li.»pe  of  thus  iiiiuriiig  the  prest;nt  Administration, 
I  an»  aware  that  llieri'  exists  thriiui^iiout  the  I'nited  Stales  at  the  preseia  time  a 
vivid  jealousy  of  the  all-encroachiiiir,  the  rapacious,  and  the  meifeiiary  spiril  of  ll;e 
foreign  policy  of  Euul.md.  1  am  not  unconscious  that  the  idea  is  daily  gaining 
ground  of  an  approacliing  necessity  on  the  part  of  the  United  Slates  to  withstand 
the  aggressive  conduct  ol  England  ai  the  hazard  of  the  not  improbable  event  of  ulti- 
mate war  ;  and  1  do  not  regret  that  the  Peo|)le  of  the  United  States  are  thus  vigi- 
lant in  relation  to  ili«»  acts  of  the  only  European  Power  in  contact  with  the  United 
Slates.  But  I  do  most  deeply  regret  to  see  that  party  spirit  is  seeking  to  possess 
itself,  for  sinister  purposes,  of  the  patriotic  feeliii<r  of  the  country  ;  and  I  say  to  the 
Opposition  that  if  they  liiink  to  make  any  thing  of  this,  in  a  party  point  of  view, 
thev  will  find  themselves  de[)lorahly  mistaken.  Gentlemen  of  the  Opposition  !  will 
you  undertake,  by  speeches  heie  impeaching  the  patriotism  of  the  Administration 
in  it-  manaiiement  of  our  relations  with  Enyland,  to  stimulate  and  madden  the  Peo- 
ple of  the  United  States  into  a  war  fever  against  England?  I  say  to  you,  do  this 
if  you  dare  !  Do  it  at  your  peril  !  For  in  whose  control  are  the  issues  of  war  and 
peace?  In  yours  or  in  ours?  Is  it  not  we  who,  if  we  hold  in  one  iiand  the  olive 
branch  of  peace,  yet  grasp,  in  the  other  the  thunderbolt  of  war,  lo  be  hurled  by  us 
against  the  enemies  of  our  country,  whensoever  the  time  for  action  shall  arrive  1 
Is  it  not  the  Government  of  the  United  States  which,  like  the  old  Roman  ambassa- 
dor, may  at  its  will  shake  forth  from  its  robes  the  tempest  of  war,  or  diffuse  through 
the  land  the  tranquil  influences  of  peace  ?  You  may,  if  you  choose,  drive  the  coun- 
try into  a  war,  and  the  ntoineiit  you  do  so,  you  render  this  Administration  perma- 
nent and  all-powerful,  and  convert  yourselves  into  a  wretched,  humble,  insignificant 
faction,  instead  of  continuing  to  be  a  constitutional  Opposition.  You  would  be,  in 
such  an  event,  forced  by  tiie  necessities  of  the  case — you  would  be  impelled,  by 
your  own  patriotism,  to  nipport  the  Government  of  your  country,  and  by  such  a 
course  of  opposition  yon  would  do  more,  than  by  all  other  causes  combined,  to 
strengthen  and  consolidate  the  pn^sent  Administration,  and  to  fi.\  it  in  the  favor  and 
support  of  the  People  of  the  United  States. 


Havii 

of  I  ho  ci 

[Mr.. 

hour  of  I 


The  1 

uation  ol 

In  the 

I  coninif 

'lia,  (Mr, 

of  that  gi 

peciajly  i 

Mr.  Van 

the  subjtf 

I  endeav 

Oppositit 

"f  the  Vf] 

tually  to  I 

issue  of  \\ 

of  the  quf 

When  '. 

ander  Mel 

on  the  for 

Houses  of 

the  Senat( 

been  disct 

so  would  I 


Nor  do 
American 
purpose,  o 
and  to  sho 
substitute  I 
one  ;   to  pi 
States,  if t 
country  to 
like  the  rel 
present  loft 
is  the  tend* 
undertake  I 
The  que 
incidental  t 
true  positio 
hack  to 
What  wa 
of  Upper  C 
surrection  I 
People  of  I 
love  of  libei 
of  love  for 
People  of  tl 
case.     To  < 
orders  occu 
United  St 
able  conseq 


{-'" 


tatt 


t 


Mocit) 
abaii' 
rt'j;ioii 
iiicJ  loi 
<i  word 

icel)isli 
i.  But 
for  ttMi 

in  this 

during 
^  i,ikt'U 
i  oilier- 
alf  ol  il 
10  much 
lal  iute- 
le  way, 

forcis;n 

K'   St'i'/.i'd 

losition. 
^)ositiau, 
/  tactics 
i  State's 
itbuut  to 
1  discus- 
U-  a  war 
istration. 
It  time  a 
rii  of  tliC 
naining 
pritlistaud 
t  1)1"  uhi- 
lius  y'ip' 
■■i  United 
1)  |)i)ssL'S;i 
V  to  tlif 
lot'  view, 
ion  !  will 
lislralion 
ho  Pio- 
I,  do  tliis 
war  and 
llie  olive 

|:d  1)V    U;^ 
arrive  1 

nibassa- 
througb 

|he  coun- 
pernia- 

Koificanf 

Id  be,  in 

illcd,  by 

sucli  li 

lined,  to 

ivor  and 


Maviiig  disposed  of  these  incidental  queytiont,  I  propose  next  to  discuss  the  mrrits 
of  thu  controversy. 

[Mr.  MoiiGAN,  of  New  York,  8U},'gesiine  thai  it  wanting  but  a  few  minutes  of  the 
hour  of  adjournment,  on  his  motion,  the  House  adjourned.] 

Friday,  June  25,  1841. 

The  House  resur.iinjr  the  consideration  of  the  resolution  of  Mr.  Floyd,  In  contin- 
uation of  the  debate  of  yesterday,  Mr.  Cushinq  said  : 

In  the  hasty  reniarks  on  this  subject,  which  I  submitted  to  the  House  yesterday, 
I  coniniented  on  the  general  spirit  of  the  speech  of  'ho  gentleman  from  Pennsylva- 
nia, (Mr.  Inukrsoll,)  and  on  sundry  incidental  t'  s  inlrudured  into  the  (ipeech 
of  that  gentleman.  1  reviewed  also  the  foreign  poli<  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  more  es- 
pecially in  relation  to  Great  Biiiain,  beginning  with  the  notorious  instruction!  of 
Mr.  Van  Buren  to  Mr.  McLane,  his  first  great  act  as  Secretary  of  Stale,  and  tracing 
the  subject  down  to  the  close  of  his  ndministr^ation  as  President  of  'lie  United  States. 
I  endeavored  also  to  exhibit  to  the  House  the  pariy  consequent*^  to  the  present 
Opposition  of  an  attempt,  on  their  part,  to  stintulate  the  war  feeling  of  the  People 
of  the  United  Slates,  and  showed  that  any  such  attempt  could  not  but  operate  even- 
tually to  consolidate  the  power  of  the  present  Administration,  in  whose  hands  the 
issue  of  war  or  peace  must,  of  necessity,  rest.  I  now  propose  to  discuss  the  meriti 
of  the  question  before  the  House. 

When  I  thus  speak  of  the  merits,  I  do  not  mean  the  merits  of  the  case  of  Alex- 
ander McLeod,  but  tlio  merits  of  the  discussion  pending,  and  of  the  concerted  attack 
on  the  foreit>n  policy  of  the  Administration  undertaken  by  the  Opposition  in  both 
Houses  of  Congress.  I  shall  avoid  to-day,  as  1  did  yesterday,  the  points  debated  in 
the  Senate.  It  would  be  idle  for  me  to  reargue  the  particular  things  which  have 
been  discussed  there  so  fully,  ably,  and  triumphantly  by  eminent  Senators.  To  do 
so  would  be 

"  To  gild  refnied  gold,  to  paint  the  lily, 
Or  add  a  perfume  to  the  violet." 

Nor  do  I  stand  here  now  to  make  apologies  for  the  foreign  D>.  partment  of  the 
American  Governtnent,  or  merely  to  defend  the  acts  of  the  Secretary  of  State.  My 
purpose,  on  the  contrary,  is  to  attack  the  course  of  the  Opposition  in  this  matter, 
and  to  show  that,  if  not  the  object,  yet  the  tendency  and  end  of  their  course  is  to 
substitute  for  the  true  issue  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  a  false 
one  ;  to  play  into  the  hands  of  England  ;  to  force  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  if  they  may,  to  abandon  the  impregnable  fortress  of  right,  and  to  drive  the 
country  to  tiie  edi»e  of  a  precipice,  over  which,  if  the  nation  should  fall,  it  would, 
like  the  rebel  anuels  in  Milton,  be  hurled  down,  as  it  were,  from  the  heaven  of  its 
present  lofty  position  into  the  bottomless  abyss  of  error  and  disaster.  This,  I  say, 
is  the  tendency  and  inevitable  result  of  the  arguments  of  the  Opposition,  as  I  will 
undertake  to  demonstrate. 

The  qiu'stion  involved  in  the  case  of  McLeod  is  a  secondary  and  incidental  one- 
incidental  to  the  main  question  of  the  attack  on  the  Caroline.  To  appreciate  the 
true  position  of  the  United  States  in  the  whole  matter,  therefore,  it  is  necessary  to 
go  back  to  the  original  fact. 

What  was  that  fact  ?  Insurrection  and  civil  war  existed  in  the  British  Province 
of  Upper  Canada,  conterminous  with  the  territory  of  the  United  States.  That  in- 
surrection had  its  root  in  caus(>s  vviiich  appealed  irresistibly  to  the  sympathies  of  tho 
People  of  the  United  States,  to  their  revolutionary  recollections,  and  to  their  innate 
love  of  liberty.  It  was  a  question  of  colonial  independence,  of  republican  feeling, 
of  love  for  liberty,  and  of  the  right  of  self-government.  It  was  impossible  for  the 
People  of  the  United  States  not  to  sympathize  with  the  insurgent  party  in  such  a 
case.  To  do  so  was  no  fault  of  theirs,  but,  on  the  contrary,  a  merit.  If  any  dis- 
orders occurred  on  our  side  of  the  line,  for  those  disorders  Great  Britain,  not  the 
United  States,  was  responsible.  Great  Britain  was  responsible  for  all  the  unavoid- 
able consequences  of  her  own  misgovernment  of  her  own  Colony,  fur  the  agitation 


.^H 


& 


which  that  iniitgovcrninent  gavo  rise  to  on  our  side  of  the  line  as  well  as  hers  ;  for 
it  WHS  the  ordinary  case  of  two  nt»i<,'hborH  (u-ciiijying  purls  of  tli<«  sHmc  house,  in 
which,  if  one  of  the  co-ten<mts  sets  liic  to  his  piirt  of  the  lioimi  ,  fiihi-r  hy  ciri-h-ss- 
ness  or  by  malice,  i(  is  his  lault  which  involves  the  otiier  in  the  cuinmon  ciilaniity. 
That  individual  citizens  of  the  United  Stiiles  (;i  the  froiilicr  shniild  be  disposed  to 
aid  the  insurt:ent  C'lnadians  was  the  nainral  and  neressury  IhcI  ;  but  tlu;  (juvern 
mint  ol'the  United  Slates  exerted  ilsell",  and  exeried  ils'-'ll' elficienlly,  lo  r^'slrain  its 
citixens,  as  the  English  Oovernmeni  itself  Ii.ih  a^ain  and  a^ain  avowed  in  the  strong- 
est trrnis.  Nay,  it  was  owing  to  tht:  »tiirt  ol)servance  of  neutrality,  on  tb»!  part  uf 
the  United  States,  that  the  Canailas  were  not,  at  tliat  time,  lost  to  (Jre.it  Britain, 

The  United  States,  in  tliin  respect,  are  above  reproach,  and  least  of  all  can  Great 
Britain  make  nur  conduct  a  subject  of  arctuation.  England  has,  at  all  times,  per 
milled,  and  frequently  encouraged,  her  subjects  to  enlist,  not  by  individuals  only, 
but  by  whole  ballalions,  in  the  civil  wars  of  other  nations,  whenever  it  was,  or  she 
the  imagined  It  was,  for  her  interest.  No  commotion  can  exist  in  any  part  of 
world,  in  Europe,  Asia,  Africa,  or  America,  into  which  she  does  not  thrust  herself 
as  a  government,  or  allow  her  subjects  to  intervene.  The  spirit  of  universal  intrr- 
meddling  is  characteristic  of  her  whole  foreign  poiiry.  The  United  States,  on 
tho  contrary,  take  a  higher  and  nobler  view  of  tlieir  duly  as  a  government.  They 
do  not  allow  themselves  to  inquire  what  is  for  their  intcrf>st;  l!iey  do  not  found  their 
foreign  policy  upon  sordid  considerations  ;  they  do  not  undertake  basely  to  prevari- 
cate in  international  questions,  by  pretending  lo  be  neutral  as  a  t  )vernmpnt,  v\  hile  their 
people  are  let  loose  as  individuals,  to  organize  war  against  a  foreign  Power.  They 
adopt,  at  the  spirit  of  their  foreign  policy,  tho  same  principle  whidi  animates 
their  domosiic  institutions,  viz :  the  assertion  and  maintenance  of  moral  right,  as 
the  only  true  guido  for  the  conduct  of  nations  as  well  as  men.  For  the  saln- 
guard  of  their  own  honor  as  a  nation,  for  ihe  love  of  fhn  eternal  principles  of  right, 
the  United  States  have,  by  a  lonu  sysieni  of  legislation,  estalilished  a  public  policy 
of  neutrality,  national  and  individual,  in  tli(;ir  loreiirn  relations.  In  this  we  have 
set  tho  example  to  llie  world — an  example  which  England  herself,  in  her  own  le- 
gislation on  the  subject,  has  been  emujjus,  in  profession  at  least,  to  follow.  And 
when  the  troubles  In  (.Canada  broke  out,  the  Federal  Government  interposed  in 
good  faith  lo  check,  and,  so  far  as  |)ossible,  prevent,  all  interference  therein  on  the 
part  of  the  people  of  the  United  Stales.  Great  Britain,  on  the  other  hand,  at  near- 
ly the  same  |)eriod  of  lime,  exhibited  the  sj)cclaclc  of  allowing  whole  regiments  of 
her  subjects  to  enlist,  arn»,  and  equip  themselves,  in  her  own  ports,  for  the  purposf; 
of  engaging  as  mercenaries  in  the  civil  wars  of  Spain  and  Portugal.  Nay,  a  mem- 
ber of  Parliament  look  the  command  of  a  British  legion  engaged  in  the  civil  war  in 
Spain,  attended  in  his  place  in  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  intervals  of  his  cam- 
paigns, and  has  been  knighted  by  the  English  Government  in  recompense  of  his 
services  in  thai  war.  A  mullilude  of  other  conspicuous  examples  miylil  be  cited  ;  in 
confirmation  of  which  is  the  fact  that  when,  in  the  year  1819,  the  English  Govern- 
ment procured  the  passage  of  an  act  to  prevent  enlistments  in  the  service  of  the  Span- 
ish colonies  against  Spain,  that  act  was  opposed  by  many  of  t!ie  most  eminent  men 
in  England,  and  in  part  by  ihe  same  men  now  in  power  there,  as  being  a  deftariure 
from  the  ancient  and  long  continued  policy  of  England,  which,  without  any  admit- 
ted breach  of  its  neutrality,  had  furnished  supplies,  munitions  of  war,  and  men,  for 
one  party  or  the  other,  in  half  the  civil  wars  of  Europe. 

I  repeat,  therefore,  that,  in  the  general  matter  of  iho  troubles  in  Canada,  ilie 
conduct  of  the  United  Slates  was  altogether  above  reproach,  at  least  so  fer  as  it  re- 
garded Great  Britain.  And  it  was  under  these  circumstances,  and  notwithstanding 
the  high-minded,  neutral  policy  of  the  United  Slates,  that  the  attack  on  the  Caro- 
line took  place.  And,  therefore,  unless  there  was  something  in  the  particular  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case  of  the  Caroline  to  take  it  out  of  the  general  principles  of 
national  right,  that  attack  was  wholly  unjustifiable,  and  confers  on  the  United  States 
an  indisputable  claim  on  Great  Britain  for  redress. 

Was  there  any  thing  Id  those  circumstances  to  constitute  such  an  exception  7 


Ther 
put, 
siiy. 
Cam 


;rs  ;  for 
jii&e,  ill 
Jiri'icjiu- 
iil.imiiy. 
losed  to 
joverii 
ilrain  its 
stroDg- 
|).irl  of 
riiHin. 
n  Great 

U'S,   \WT 

lis  only, 
s,  or  she 
f  pari  of 
t  li«'r«nlf 
ill  iriirr- 
ate<i,  on 
,      Tl.ry 
jnd  tlifir 
prevari- 
liile  their 
.     They 
unimstes 
rij^ht,  as 
[\w  salfi- 
ol'  right, 
ic  policy 
vvt'  have 
[  own  le- 
Arid 
oscA   ill 
n  on  the 
at  ncar- 
m'Hts  of 
purpos' 
H  iiicni- 
I  war  in 
lis  c.im- 
G  of  his 
itnd  ;  in 
ovorn- 
e  Spaii- 
ent  men 
'parttre 
admit- 
en,  for 

ladu,  tiiR 
las  it  rp- 

^tandiiig 

Caro- 

laf  cir- 

tiplcs  of 

Slates 

leption  T 


There  is  hut  one  ■olitHry  ground  upon  whirli  any  mm  h  pretence  ol  exception  can  1m 
))Ut,  or  in  any  of  tlie  hooks  on  interihitioiial  law  is  put — and  lliat  i.s,  absohiti!  iieces- 
»liy.  There  was  no  such  necessity  in  this  case.  Il  MciNab  di.siied  lo  destroy  the 
Caroline  as,  in  the  al»urd  and  ridiculeus  hiiigna<;e  of  the  English  Guvernnieiil,  ii 
piratical  vessel,  ho  could  ha\(.'  done  so  wlicii  .sh<:  crossed  user  lo  the  Enulish  side, 
and  was  in  the  act  of  '•  snspDriinp  piT»ons  or  niiinitions  of  war,  if  she  did  so,  to 
ISavy  Llaiul.  But  h.  iiade  tho  attta  k  o'l  her  as  she  lay  peaieahly  moored  to  (he 
wharf  ai  Sclilosstr.  I!e  had  not  even  the  excuse  of  enieriii^  the  territory  oi'  the 
United  rftates  in  the  hot  pursuit  of  a  veasel  cauylit  in  the  fierfunnaiice  of  any  act 
injurious  to  his  Governniiiii.  His  invasion  of  the  tiriitory  ol  the  Uiiied  States 
was  cowardly,  iliit'f-like,  wanton,  yratuiious,  and  unjiistitiahle.  Doing  tliii  in  pur- 
suance of  the  Didirs  of  his  Governm<'nl,  or  doin;^'  ii  of  his  own  head,  a.,d  the  act 
having  suhsequenily  been  assumed  and  justified  by  bis  Government,  what  he  did 
consiiiulod  an  acl  of  war  against  the  Uiiitec  Slates.  1  say  an  act  of  war ;  for  there 
may  bo  an  act  of  war  without  ;liere  existiiii,'  any  st  ite  of  continuous  or  declared 
warfare.  And  the  GovtTinm.iH  of  the  L'nit<d  Slates,  in  claiming  reparation  of 
Great  Britain  immediaiely  ulterward>,  made  that  claim  on  the  ground  thai  what  had 
been  done,  if  avowed  or  assumed  by  the  British  Government,  consiituted  an  act  of 
war,  as  I  shall  show  liereafier  by  the  [iroduction  of  tin?  despatch  on  that  subject, 
addressed  by  Mr.  Stevenson  to  Lord  I'almer.Ioii.  And  1  assume,  as  the  premises 
fall  that  1  shall  have  to  say  concerning  llic  case  of  McLeod,  that,  in  tho  precise 
matter  of  the  Caroline,  tin;  United  Stairs  possess  such  a  clear  and  manifest  ri^bt  of 
redress  against  (ireai  Britain,  for  lii)>iile  invasion  of  the  lerntoiy  o(  the  United 
States,  that,  it  the  controversy  should  tiid  in  war,  the  Uniied  Stales  may  contidenl- 
ly  appeal  to  the  judgmtnt  of  men  amJ  of  iii'tions,  and  of  liiejust  God  who  overrules 
all,  for  our  vindication  in  respect  o\'  whatever  calamity  and  blootlslied  might  ensue. 
Our  position  in  this  matter,  if  we  do  not  stupidly  and  madly  abandon  it,  U  a  stron;;, 
unsbakt  able,  and  i.iipregnabh;  one. 

And  il  is  in  this  point  of  view  that  I  object  lo  the  course  of  the  ^enll<>mall  from 
Pennsylvania.  I  doubt  not  the  English  (joveremenl  would  be  very  glad,  for  the 
great  and  trui'  issue  in  the  case  of  ihe  (Jaroiin«s  to  substitute  the  jieity  and  tlie  l;il>e 
one  of  McLeod  ;  tor  that  issue  in  which  the  judgment  and  sympathies  of  the  wliolo 
world  would  be  on  our  side,  to  raise  up  a  new  one,  whtio  that  judgment  and  those 
sympathies  would  of  necessity  be  on  the  side  of  England.  And  I  charge  upon  the 
gentleman  from  Pennsylvania — I  accuse  liim  and  those  who  act  with  him — i  ar- 
raign tlujMi  bcfuie  tlir  (wople  of  the  Uniied  States — 1  bold  li'eni  responsible  lo  ilie 
country,  for  allowing  themselve.'s  to  become  the  blind  instruments  of  England,  against 
the  interest  and  honor  ol  the  (iovcrnment  iind  People  of  tlu;  Unii.id  States.  I  hold 
them  to  all  pifscnt  and  future  rt.'spoiisibiliiy  fir  whatever  mischief  may  come,  if,  by 
the  course  they  ure  pursuing,  they  force  the  Lnited  States  from  the  dignity  and  ma- 
jesty of  the  [)()sit!on  we  now  occupy  in  this  matter,  and  compel  us  to  relinquish  our 
own  triumpliaiit  issuf,  to  ado|)l  that  which  England  would  fain  present  to  us,  for  her 
advantage  and  our  disgrace. 

But  this  is  not  nil.  Tiie  (piestion  of  the  CaroliiH!  is  not  the  only  one  [lending 
between  England  and  the  Unitisd  States.  There  are  many  others:  in  all  which, 
as  in  that  of  the  (.'aroline,  tin;  Uniied  States  ar«'  the  ..ggri(  ved  and  coin(jlainant  party, 
and  on  .iiiy  of  wliicli  lix'  United  States  iMgl,*,  if  oci:asi(.n  required,  and  no  other 
means  of  redn-ss  existed,  justifiably  enter  upot   war  with  Great  Biilain. 

In  th'j  first  pl.ice,  we  have  the  old  and  long-pending  questions  of  boutidary — not 
merely  that  of  the  Norlbeastern  boundary,  but  of  two-thirds  of  the  long  line  of  fron- 
tier, extendin;:  from  the  mouth  of  Passamaquoddy  bay,  across  tlie  continent,  to  the 
shores  of  the  Pacilic  ocean  ;  the  larger  part  of  which  is  still  wholly  unsettled,  and 
upoti  the  line  of  vvhich  (ireat  Britain  is  cmitinually  committing  acts  of  gross  aggres- 
sion on  the  rights  of  tlw  United  States.  For  all  these  wrongs  the  day  of  judgment 
and  redress  must  come  ;  and  in  these  great  boundary  questions  England  might  well 
jump  at  the  chance  of  interposinc  the  case  of  McLeod,  and  complaint  against  us 
for  wrong  in  that  matter.     Britain  would  willingly  interpose  this  case  between  us 


10 

and  our  ciuinis  uii  iier,  if  wc  have  tlit*  folly  tu  allow  Iter  to  do  so.  1  appeal  to  the 
members  from  the  State  of  Maine,  I  appmil  to  those  from  the  great  ^orthvvest, 
whether  they  will  softer  themselves  to  be  drawn  into  a  position  so  false  as  this;  and 
whether  they  are  content  to  follow  in  the  lead  of  the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania 
in  this  matter,  and  to  become  the  instrumenta  of  Great  Britain  in  the  sacrifice  of  the 
rights  of  all  the  frontier  States. 

In  the  second  place,  go  to  the  soa,  anel  you  find  that  in  the  vast  career  of  am- 
bition and  conquest  in  which  England  is  hurrying  along  to  some  great  but  inappre- 
ciable consunmiation,  she  is  perpetually  there,  also,  rommitiing  aggressions  on  the 
rights  of  the  United  States.     Among  these,  are  acts  of  the  gravest  and  most  threat- 
ening description.     I  do  not  allude  to  here  and  there  a  case  of  blockade  operating 
injuriously  upon  our  commerce.     1  do  not  speak  njerely  of  the  innovation  upon  the 
law  of  nations  which  England  is  endeavoring  to  fciie  upon  us  at  the  expense  of  our 
Southern  States,  in  the  reiterated  cases  of  our  shipwrecked  slaves  unlawfully  taken 
from  their  masters  by  British  officers   in   the  West  Indies,  new  instances  of  which 
have  occurred  within  the   last  year.     But  I  allude  more  particularly  to  the  long  se- 
ries of  insolent  acts  of  search  and  seizure  of  our  vessels  perpetrated  by  English  crui- 
sers on  the  coast  of  Africa.     Are  gentlemen   aware   that   these  acts  have  already, 
within  two  years,  been  so  fearfully  multiplied  that  set  representations  of  <ii?cM^//-/oMr 
such  cases  have  already  been  formally  brought  by  injured  parties  to  the  notice  of  the 
Department  of  State  1     And  they  constitute  cases  of^  wilful  injury  and  public  aggres- 
sion, second  only  to  those  old  acts  of  search  which  were  among  the  primary  causes 
of  the  last  war  with  Great  Britain.     For  when,  subsequently  to  the  Congress  of  Vi- 
enna, the  English  Government    entered   into   negotiation  with  the  great  Powers  of 
Europe  and  America,  for  the  purpose  of  adopting  concerted  means  of  putting  an 
end  to  the  Atrican  slave  trade,  she  proposed  to  us  an  arrangement  for  a  reciprocal 
right  of  search  on  the   coast  of  Africa.     The   object  was  a  noble  and  a  generous 
one — the  termination  of  the  slave  trade.     We  were  as  anxious  as  she  to  extinguish 
thai  trade,  as  we  have  evinced  by  our  legislation  upon  the  subject.     But  our  Govern- 
ment said  to  that  of  England,  and  said   rightly  :  We  cannot  and  we  will  not  trust 
you  in  this  matter;  your  conduct  at  sea  in  the  wars  of  the  French  Revolution  was 
so  full  of  aggression  and  usurpation  that  we  decline  to  entertain  any  proposition 
for  placing  in  the  hands  of  your  cruisers  a  power  so  delicate  and  dangerous  as  that 
of  searching  our  vessels,  though  for  ever  so  good  a  purpose.     And  upon  that  pre- 
cise point  the  negotiations  were  broken  off  and  ceased.     And  the  recent  acts  of 
search  and  seizure  are  not  only  violations  of  the   immunity  of  our  flag,  under  the 
law  of  nations,  but  they  are  aggravated  by  the  consideration  that  th  y  are  the  exer- 
cise of  a  right  which  England  requested  us  to  concede  to  her  by  treaty,  and  which 
we  positively  refused  to  concede.     And  it  is  important  to  observe  thai  these  outra- 
ges have  been  committed  under  authority  of  an  act  of  Parliament,  passed  in  1839, 
against  the   remonstrance  and   protest  of  men  the  most  pre-eminent,  such  as  the 
Duke  of  Wellington,  who  warned  Parliament  that  the  act,  if  passed,  would  inevita- 
bly and  almost  instantly  bring  the  Englisli  Government  into  collision  with  the  Uni- 
ted States,  upon  a  point  where  the  United  States  were,  most  of  all,  sensitive  and 
prompt  for  war ;  that  England  would  be  liable  to  us  for  every  detention  of  our  ves- 
sels ;  and  that,  if  there  was  one  point  more  to  be  avoided  than   another,  it  was  the 
detention  and  visitation  of  vessels  belonging  to  the  United  States.     Upon  all  these 
maritime  questions  the   United   States   liave  stored  up  against  England  a  great 
body  of  wrongs,  amply  sufficient  'o  call  for  and  to  justify  the  interposition  of  the 
public  force  of  the  Union.     Here,  also,  we  have  the  right  on  our  side.     Here,  also, 
our  position  is  an  impregnable  one,  so  long  as  we  choose  to  stand  on  it.    And  again, 
I  appeal  to  every  member  of  this  House  nut  to  allow  himself  to  be  blinded  by  party 
spirit  or  misled  by  party  associations,  into  allowing  a  false  issue  upon  the  case  of 
Mc'-eod  to  take  the  place  of  these,  the  true  ones,  in  any  possible  war  between  us 
and  Great  Britain.     When  the  shock  comes,  as  come  it  well  may,  let  us  take  care 
that,  in  addition  to  the  strength  and  the  spirit  enlisted  on  our  side  of  the  struggle, 
^e  may  also  have  the  right,  remembering  that, 

•'  Thrice  ib  ho  armed  who  hath  his  quarrel  just." 


I  mi' 

I  iijiiiiiii 
llt.Miiau 
justice 
of  the  (1 
cussed 
The 
the  lette 
Admini 
for  mak 
himself 
little  ins 
|»urport 
the  first 


IS  very 

Next, 
Fox  coi 
such  as 
made  th 
liiig,  wli 
o(  th.;  C 


II 


!• 


1  ini'.'iit  slop  liore  and  conteni  myst'lf  wiiii  i'Aliibili;j;j  what  1  conceive  to  b«  the 
I  iiiiiiiiiu;,  iiiisirijided,  and  pernicious  iendeiu y  and  oli'ect  of  tho  course  of  the  gen- 
tlt'Mian  from  Pennsylvuiiu  (Mr.  Ingbrsollj  inid  his  friends  in  this  matter.  But  in 
justice  to  tlie  <.'entluman  from  Pennsylvani  i .  I  ought,  perhaps,  to  examine  some 
of  the  principal  of  ilmse  lesser  questions  of  <ii'?lomacy  and  law  which  he  has  dis- 
cussed in  his  spetjch  with  so  much  of  impuM;ig  air  of  conviction  and  truth. 

The  Lfintleman  dwells  emphatically  ujioii  the  fact,  and  more  than  once,  too,  that 
the  letter  of  Mr.  Fox  is  dated  almost  immediately  after  the  accession  of  the  present 
Administration,  insinuating  that  the  British  (jovernment  selected  that  precise  time 
fur  making  the  demand.  How  is  it  possible  that  the  gentleman  should  thus  allow 
himself  to  contempl:^te  things  through  an  inveri<d  telescope,  and  to  see  them  in  the 
little  instead  of  the  large?  Does  not  the  letter  of  Mr.  Fox,  upon  the  face  of  it, 
purport  to  be  merely  a  continuation  of  the  correspondence ;  not  a  demand  then  for 
the  first  time  made  at  a  selected  season,  but  a  demand  reiterated,  and  bearing  date 
at  Just  such  lime  as  in  the  natural  course  of  communication  with  and  instruction 
from  ills  own  Government  it  naturally  might  du  ?  This  suggestion  of  the  gentleman 
is  very  small  game. 

Next,  the  gentleman  labors  very  much  to  show  that  the  language  in  which  Mr. 
Fox  couches  the  demand  is  that  of  menace  ;  that  it  is  threatening  language,  and 
such  as  the  American  Government  ought  to  have  refused  to  answer,  or  to  have 
made  the  subject  of  a  counter-demand  for  ex[)lanation,  in  the  spirit  of  private  duel- 
ling, which  is  the  illustration  applied  to  the  point  in  the  discussion  at  the  other  end 
of  th<;  Capitol.     The  words  are  these  : 

••  But,  be  that  as  it  may,  Her  Majesty's  Government  lormally  demund,  upon  the  grounds  al- 
ready stated,  llie  immediate  release  of  Mr.  McLeod ;  ami  Her  Majesty's  Government  entreat  the 
President  of  tlie  United  States  to  take  into  his  most  d'  lilcrate  consideration  the  serious  nature  of 
the  consequences  whicli  must  ensue  from  a  rejection  ol  this  demand." 

Tiiere  are  two  clauses,  the  first  containing  the  words  of  simple  demand,  which 
are  purely  fonnal  and  technical,  and  such  as  are  commonly  used  in  such  cases. 
The  second  contains  intimation  of  possible  consequences  to  foHow  a  refusal  to  com- 
ply with  the  demand.  And  it  is  these  expressions,  1  suppose,  that  gentlemen  con- 
strue as  a  menace.  iNow  it  is  observable  that,  in  these  very  expressions,  the  /an- 
guage  of  Mr.  Fox  is  that  of  entreaty  expressly.  He  entreats  our  Government. 
But  it  may  be  said,  this  is  courteous  language,  to  cover  a  discourteous  idea.  Be 
it  so,  if  you  please  ;  I  have  nothing  to  say  in  extenuation  of  the  tone  ol  England 
in  her  foreign  diplomacy.  It  is  too  frequently  characterized  by  that  insolent  island 
morgue  which  is  ascribed  to  Englishmen.  It  may  well  be  thougiit  that  Mr.  Fox,  in 
the  language  he  has  adopted,  has  trod  upon  the  very  verge  of  oflence.  But  he  has 
not  passed  that  verge.  It  would  snvor  of  the  petulance  of  a  spoiled  boy  for  our 
Government  to  fly  into  a  passion  at  this  act  of  imputed  bad  taste  or  ill  manners  of 
Mr,  Fox.  And  1  have  the  b(>st  possible  reason  to  give  to  the  gentlemen  of  the 
Opposition  why  they  should  not  accuse  Mr.  Webster  of  a  want  of  spirit  in  omitting 
to  treat  this  intimation  of  consequences  as  a  threat  precluding  respectful  answer. 
For  precisely  the  same  idea,  in  almost  the  same  language,  was  presented  by  Mr. 
Tox  to  Mr.  Forsyth,  in  his  letter  of  the  29ih  of  December,  when  he  before  de- 
manded the  release  of  McLeod.     The  words  are  these  : 

'•  I  cannot  but  foresee  the  very  grave,  and  serious  consei/iiences  (hat  must  ensue  if,  besides  the 
injury  already  inflicted  upon  Mr.  McLeod,  of  a  vexatious  and  unjust  imprisonment,  any  further 
harm  may  be  done  him  in  the  progress  of  this  extraordinary  proceeding." 

And  Mr.  Webster,  like  Mr.  Forsyth,  while  returning  to  this  demand  a  refusal  as 
peremptory  as  the  demand  itself,  might  well  reflect  that  ho  best  consulted  the  dig- 
nity of  the  American  Government  by  not  being  over-anxious  to  cavil  about  words, 
Ot  over-jealous  to  find  in  them  matter  of  oflence. 

The  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania  proceeds  to  lament  that  Mr.  Webster  has,  as 
he  conceives,  capitulated  away  the  rights  of  the  United  States,  by  admitting  and 
even  anticipating  Mr.  Fox  in  the  declaration  that  the  attack  on  the  Caroline  was  an 
act  of  war.     In  this  complaint  the  gentleman  forgets  that  Mr.  Fox  expressly  de- 


I  I 


V2 


scribes  llie  aliack  on  tlit*  Caroline!  as  an  acl  ol'  public  lorrr,  and  tlicielori!  it  is 
untrue  that  Mr.  Webster  anticipates  him  in  ibis  idea.  Then,  does  Mr.  VVebj.tei 
etr  in  accediii;:  thus  to  the  sugjri'stion  of  Mr  Fox?  Ouj^lit  he  to  iiave  denied  the 
assunintion  ?  I  I'eply,  that  lie  could  not  deny  it.  First,  the  attack  tin  the  Caroline, 
as  the  matter  now  stood,  was,  in  point  ot  lati,  an  act  ol  war  ;  and,  therelore,  to  have 
asserii'd  tlie  contrary,  would  have  been  to  assuri  a  lalseiiood.  ^^econdly,  there  is 
no  lille  of  claim  in  virtue  of'  which  the  United  States  can  demand  reparation  ot 
England  I'or  the  attack,  except  in  treating  it  as  a  hostile  act  of  the  British  Gove^rn- 
ment.  Tiiirdly,  Mr.  \Veb>ter  was  precluded,  uy  the  act  of  his  predecessor,  Irom 
taking  any  other  ground.  In  treating-  it  as  an  acl  ot'  war,  he  did  but  continue  in 
the  sense  of  Mr.  Van  Buren's  Administration,  and  lollow  the  lii-hts  Itetore  him  in 
the  Oeparlnteiit  of  Staie.  For  the  L'Hnileman  from  Pennsylvania  and  his  friends 
have  not  only  shut  their  eyes  to  the  merits  ol  the  casi  ,  liu;  tiiey  have  forgotten  its 
histor} . 

It  is  strange  enough  that  the  friends  of  Mr.  \  at)  Hun-n  shoidd  deny  that  the  at- 
tack on  the  Candinc  was  an  act  if  «ai.  I  reply  to  lliem,  not  oidy  by  exhibiting 
the  reason  and  the  principle  of"  the  thin<j,  but  by  citinj.'  the  autiiorily  of  their  own 
President.  I  hold  in  my  hand  a  co|iy  of  ih«>  despatch  addressed  by  Mr.  Stevenson 
to  Lord  Palmerston,  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  Van  Bnren,  makini:  demand  ol 
repaiation  lor  the  destruction  of  the  Caroline;  and  in  tli.ii  despatch,  which  has 
been  publislied,  Mr.  Stevenson  |)ursues  the  only  course  he  could  pursue.  He  pro- 
ceeds to  prove  the  hostile  nature  of  the  acl  by  a  full  exhibition  of  facts,  and  con- 
cludes and  wi"ds  up  the  whole  with  declaring  in  these  words  :  "  The  case,  then,  is 
one  of  o[)en,  undist^uised,  and  unwarrantable  hostilitv."  After  this,  let  no  man 
complain  of  Mr.  VVebsler  for  having  put  the  cu^e  of  the  Caroline  on  the  same  pre 
cise  ground  which  Mr.  Van  Buren  had  assumed  for  it,  and  which,  indeed,  is  the 
only  ground  upon  which  the  United  States  could  undertake  to  h;)ld  the  British  Go- 
veromrnt  responsible. 

The  yentleman  from  Pennsylvania  would  have  the  House  beli»'ve  that  the  Secre- 
tary ot'  State,  neglecting  the  authorities  of  the  English  law,  goes  lor  the  guide  of 
his  o[)inions  in  the  matter  to  the  continental  jurists  and  to  countries  where  power  is 
strong  and  right  feeble.  This  is  one  of  the  numeroui;  exainj)les  of  small  criticism, 
and  of  complaint  by  insinuation,  in  which  tiie  gentleman  has  indulged  in  the  course 
of  his  speech.  But  in  truth  it  is  he  and  his  friends,  instead  of  Mr.  Webster,  who 
go  to  the  jurists  ol  the  Continent  in  this  niitter.  Upon  what  only  legal  authority 
do  they  controvert  the  positions  of  Mr.  Webster?  Is  it  not  a  passage  in  the  Conli- 
nental  jurist,  Vattel  ?  Whilst  it  is  the  English  jurist,  Rutlierlorth,  who  fidly  and 
eiuphalically  sustains  Mr.  Webster.  If  in  ibis  question  there  be  any  who  draw 
their  opinions  from  the  unregenerated  principles  of  the  European  Continental  law, 
any  who  drink  at  these  poisoned  sources,  it  is  the  friends  of  the  gentleman  from 
Pennsylvania. 

The  uentleman  proceeds  to  det.y  all  the  legal  positioi's  of'  the  Secretary,  one  by 
OIM'.  Whilst  doiuij  this,  he  seems  to  t'orpet  that  the  Secretary  of  S'ale  is  not  the 
law  otlicer  of  the  Government.  The  barbed  shafts  which  he  aims  at  Daniel  Web- 
ster pass  innocuous  by  him  ;  and  if  ther*?  be  any  venom  on  their  points,  they  strike 
it  into  the  bosom,  not  of  the  Secretary  ot'  Stale,  but,  Mr.  Speaker,  of  your  own 
brilliant  and  adniirablo  representative  in  the  Cabinet,  Jnhn  .1.  Crittenden,  the 
Attorney  General  of  the  United  Staffs. 

In  the  first  place,  the  gentleman,  if  I  undi;rstand  Iiim,  denies  that,  in  any  event, 
jurisdiction  in  the  case  of  McLeod  could  be  transferred  from  the  courts  of  the  State 
of  New  York  to  those  of  the  United  States;  and  also  denies  that  the  Governmenl 
of  the  United  Stales  would  have  the  power  to  cause  a  no/fe  prosequi  in  ti;e  case 
to  be  entered  here.  I  was  surprised  to  hear  such  sugjiestions  fall  fiom  the  learned 
gentleman.  I  cannot  pretend  to  the  long  lecal  experience  of  the  gentleman  from 
Pennsylvania,  and  I  have  some  time  since  thrown  ofl"  the  robes  of  the  bar;  but  I 
had  supposed  ihat  there  was  one  great  statute  in  the  books,  which  lay  at  the 
threshold  of  all  legal  knowledge  in  the  United   States;  and  that  no  man  in  this 


country 
out  bear 


sect! 


Soih 


cases  as 
to  tlic  pr 


fl 


00. ••  to 


ment,  ac(l 
out  I  be  LJ 
present,  il 
cabioef,  a| 


But. 


in 


mit   tiiat 

.Slate,  as 

upon  liie 

they  see  ml 

gone  toi:et| 

to  that  G« 

on  the  I5i| 

Fox  was  I) 

to  -New  Y( 

P'lrt  of  iIk 

1  have  1)0 

trary,  to  m 

Tile  den 

\\  ebster  01 

able  fii'liiy  1 

so  consider 

history,  and 

came   the  ii 

wliicli   cove 

accession  of 

be  pretende 

starices  reqi 

speech  in  tl 

new  Admin 

(Mernity.      I 

fully  ciuDpoi 

thai  Executi 

action  of  ih^ 

and   toils  att 

only   by  a  d 

the  mortal  s 

mind  all  this 

ally  as  there 

demand  of  t 

But  whilst 

wait  for  a  ct 

progress  of 

Fox's  demar 

State  of  iNh 

question  of 

what  inllueni 

It  did  in  the; 

ously  demant 

of  justice  in 

do — but  onh 


18 


It  tlio 

Itrikc 
|uwn 
the 

l^eiit, 

louse 

Iroiii 

It  I 

the 

Ithis 


country  couhJ  c^'m  I'daiission  inio  ilic  icinple  of  Jiistire,  ns  a  niiiiiiter  thnrt',  with- 
out bearing  that  statiiH'  ii:  his  liaiid.  1  it'ler  to  the  judiciary  act  of  1789,  in  the 
21th  snction  of  which  e.\|)rrss  provision  is  made  for  tlie  transfer  of  precisely  such 
rases  as  this  from  th'^  courts  of  tin-  States  to  those  of  the  United  States.  And  as 
to  the  power  '.o  enter  a  ftollc  prosequi,  I  appeul  lo  any  and  every  lawyer  on  tiiis 
floor  to  s:iy  whellier  t'lis  power  do.-s  not  belong;  to  tiie  l.iw  officer  of  the  Govern- 
nienl,  according  to  the  esiahlished  practice  of  every  tribunal,  high  or  low,  tluongh- 
out  liio  United  ."^lates.  This  ijie  Attorney  G'-neral  niij^hi  do,  in  such  a  ca>p  as  the 
presf'iu,  if  he  saw  fii,  not  under  di(  tation  ot  \\v  President,  but  as  a  menib«'r  of  his 
cabinet,  and  participaiint;  in  ids  policy. 

But,  in  the  se'cund  plac;',  the  gentleman  and  his  friends,  while  they  seem  to  ad- 
mit that  upon  the  main  point  in  controversy  the  principles  of  the  Seciotary  of 
.State,  as  develop»nl  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Fox,  are  substantially  correct,  yet  fasten 
upon  liie  letter  of  instrncticms  to  Mr.  Critu-nden  as  the  s;reat  cause  of  comphiint ; 
they  seem  to  admit  that,  so  iwr  as  regards  Great  Britain,  if  the  two  letters  had 
gone  loiiether,  in  point  ol'dale,  tliey  would  have  constiiuted  the  satisfactory  answer 
to  that  Government,  but  that  the  h  tier  to  Mr.  Crittenden,  statiding  by  itself,  dated 
on  tiie  15th  of  Marcli,  is  a  conccs-ion  lo  Enulaiid  in  fact,  while  the  letter  to  Mr. 
Fox  was  but  a  deni.ii  of  concession  in  form,  and  that  the  visit  ol'  Mr.  Crittenden 
to  -New  York  was  an  act  of  interierence  with  the  tilbunals  of  that  Siate  on  the 
P'lrt  of  tlie  Federal  Government.  1  state  these  objections  thus  distinctly,  because 
1  have  no  wish  to  evade  any  thins;  in  this  niatter;  but  am  solicitous,  on  il:e  con- 
trary, to  meet  everv  ihing  lace  lo  iace,  openly  and  directly. 

TIh'  demand  of  xMr.  Fox  is  dMl^d  on  the  12ih  of  March,  and  the  reply  of  Mr, 
Wfbster  on  the  24ih  of  April.  Is  there  any  just  reason  to  treat  this  as  uiijt  i  tion- 
ai)le  dilay"?  Mo  gentleman  who  reflects  lur  a  moment  can,  in  candor  and  honor, 
so  consider  it.  That  period  was  crowded  with  important  events  i/i  em-  domestic 
history,  and  devolved  immense  cares  upon  the  ministi-rs  of  the  Govetjunent.  First 
came   the  introduction   of  Geni-ral    Uariison  to  power;   next,  ids  calandious  deaih. 


which    covered  the  land   in   mournina,  and    filled   it   willi   lameniaii 


on. 


Tl 


ten    the 


accession  of  the  now  President  of  the  I'niled  States.  In  such  a  period  it  cannot 
be  pretendi.'d  that  an  elaborate  reply  to  the  letter  of  Mr.  Fox,  such  as  the  circuni- 
statices  required,  should  have  been  thrown  off  in  the  exlem[)oraneous  haste  of  a 
speech  in  this  House.  It  was  to  be  the  starting  point  of  the  foreign  policy  of  the 
new  Administration,  and  was  to  be  written,  not  for  time  only,  but  as  it  were  for 
(Mernity.  Its  princi[)!t's  were  to  be  deliberately  meditated,  and  its  language  care- 
fully composed,  li  was  to  be  examinetl  by  the  Executive,  and  on  the  change  of 
thai  Executive  to  be  re-examined  by  him  who  is  to  be  responsible  lor  the  future 
action  of  the  Government.  It  was  to  be  prepared  amidst  all  the  harassing  cares 
and  (oils  attendin;:  thi>  commencement  oi"  a  new  Administration;  interrupted  not 
only  bv  a  death  in  the  i''amily  of  the  Secretary — of  which  1  say  nothing — but  by 
the  mortal  sickness  of  the  President  of  the  United  Slates.  No  man  who  recalls  to 
nund  all  this,  can  impute  delay  in  the  matter  :o  the  Depaitment  of  Slate,  tspeci- 
allv  as  there  was  nothing  to  render  it  necessary  to  give  an  instant  answer  to  the 
demand  of  the   British   Government. 

liut  whilst  explanation  and  justification  on  the  piirt  of  our  Government  might  well 
wait  for  a  convenient  time,  its  action  could  not  wait.  That  was  hurried  on  by  the 
progress  of  events.  On  the  'Z-2(\  of  March,  only  ten  days  after  the  date  of  Mr. 
Fox's  demand,  McLeod  stood  for  trial  at  Lockport,  in  the  western  extremity  of  the 
State  of  New  Ytuk;  and  upon  the  issue  of  that  trial,  it  might  be,  depended  the 
;  question  of  peace  or  war  between  Great  Britain  and  the  United  Slates.  Under 
i'       what  influences  'ind  in  whose  hands  that  trial  might  be,  the  GJovernnient  knew  not 


m 


^ 

!^«l 


11 


It  did  in  these  circumstances  what  the  safeguard  of  the  honor  of  the  nation  iinperi-  i      I   ! 

oiisly  demanded.     It  despatched  an  agent  of  its  own,  not  to  interfere  with  the  coursB  ; 

of  justice  in  New  York — for  thai  Mr.  Crittenden  neither  did  nor   was  instructed  to  ; 

du— but  only  tu  be  un  the  spot,  ready  to  act  in  behalf  uf  the  United  States,  un  tli«  \ 


14 


occurrence  of  any  one  of  the  sevfiral  contin[;(>ncies  which  inioht  render  such  action 
wise,  consiitntlonal,  and  necessary.  And  \\w  instrnotions  to  Mr.  Crittenden  wen;, 
at  the  time,  nothing  but  an  act  of  the  memliers  of  the  Government  hetween  them- 
selves, in  which  England  had  no  part. 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  repeat  that  neither  in  purpose  nor  in  fact  did  the  (Government 
of  the  United  Stales  on  this  occasion  touch  the  sovereign  rights  of  the  State  of  New 
York.  Like  the  gentleman  from  Georgia,  (Mr.  ALroRD,)  I  would  have  the  rights  of 
that  State  in  this  matter  to  be  held  not  only  sacred,  but  sacrosanct.  I  repose  en- 
tire contidence  i.i  the  integrity  of  her  courts.  I  believe  they  will  deal  wisely  and 
justly  in  this  mait»'r ;  that  they  will  administer  the  law  in  trutlj  -ind  in  honor  ;  and 
that  they  will  take  into  their  consideration  not  only  the  municipal  law  of  which  the 
gentleman  from  Pennsylvania  has  had  so  much  'o  say,  but  the  law  of  nations  also, 
which  is  as  much  the  law  of  the  State  of  New  York  as  it  is  that  of  the  United 
States. 

If  that  gentleman  is  to  be  believed,  Mr.  Webster  has  lost  a  great  »;hance, 
as  it  is  called,  to  grapple  with  England  at  a  time  when  her  arms  were  diffused  over 
the  world,  and  she  was  unable  to  cope  with  us  to  advantage.  Sir,  it  is  not  the 
policy  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  go  about  grasping  at  advantages 
to  do  wrong.  Her  march  is  along  the  luminous  path  of  justice  and  of  honor.  To 
England  be  that  of  grasping  ambition,  of  outreaching  rapacity,  and  of  wrong,  as 
wide  as  the  all  but  boundless  range  of  her  empire.  Us,  however,  she  must  not 
assail  with  impunity.  \nd,  that  we  may  be  able  to  meet  her  in  the  righteousness 
of  a  good  cause,  let  us  take  care  that  in  this  thing  no  taint  or  blemish  rests  on  the 
spotless  ermine  of  our  honor.  Let  us  beware  not  to  be  diverted  into  the  false 
issue  of  the  case  of  McLeod,  as  viewed  by  the  Opposition;  but  let  us  continue  to 
stand  upon  the  lofty  elevation  of  truth  and  justice,  where,  like  the  knights  in  the 
old  times  of  chivalry,  we  may  abide,  lance  in  rest,  to  defy  the  attacks  of  all  chal- 
lengers, confident  in  reliance  upon  our  own  good  right,  and  the  just  judgniont  of 
God.  This,  and  not  the  mercenary  pursuit  of' great  chances,  is  the  principle  which 
animates  the  present  Administration  in  its  conduct  towards  England. 

It  is  more  than  once  insinuated  by  the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania,  that  in  this 
negotiation  the  Secretary  of  State  has  one  set  of  motives,  whilst  not  only  the  de- 
ceased President  of  the  United  Slates,  but  the  present  PresidiMit  also,  have  had 
different  ones  ;  and  passag>^s  of  patriotic  declarations  from  the  inaugural  addresses 
of  Gen.  Harrison  and  Mr.  Tyler  are  r.ied  to  this  end.  Let  not  the  gfntlemnn  lay 
this  flattering  unction  to  his  soui.  I  can  assure  him  that,  as  well  under  the  lute 
Executive  as  the  present,  the  Administration  has  been  animated  in  all  its  parts, 
by  the  same  unanimous  spirit  of  anxiety  to  preserve  the  peace  of  the  United 
States,  if  it  may  be  done  with  honor,  and  to  resolve,  at  all  hazards,  to  suffer  no 
wrong  on  the  part  of  England  or  any  other  Power  to  go  unredressed. 

Sir,  it  remains  only  that  I  briefly  touch  one  other  subject  in  conclusion  of  the 
remarks  which  I  had  contemplated  submitting  to  the  House.  The  gentleman  from 
Pennsylvania  puts  to  us,  very  emphatically,  the  supposed  dilemma  in  which  the 
United  States  would  be  involved  either  way  :  whether  the  Supreme  Court  of  New 
York  shall  overrule  the  plea  of  McLeod,  and  send  him  to  his  trial  at  bar,  or 
whether,  on  the  other  hand,  that  court  shall  decide  on  the  surrender  of  McLeod. 
I  have  said  already,  and  I  repeat,  that  1  will  not  re-argue  at  length  that  part  of 
this  case  which  has  been  discussed  in  the  Senate,  and  1  touch  upon  it  now  only  so 
far  as  may  be  requisite  to  the  completeness  of  my  reply  to  the  gentleman  from 
Pennsylvania.  I  could  not  but  be  amused  to  hear  that  gentleman  lamenting,  with 
such  interesting  sadness,  the  omission  of  Mr.  Webster  to  copy  the  language  of  Mr. 
Monroe,  in  the  message  quoted  by  him,  (or  rather  of  Mr.  Adams,  whose  words  they 
were,)  in  making  statement  of  the  principles  which  guide  the  foreign  policy  of  the 
United  States.  Now  it  so  'lappens  that,  in  the  most  important  and  material  part 
of  his  letter  to  Mr.  Fox,  Mr.  Webster,  solicitous  to  be  right,  and  to  be  right  in  ac 
cordance  with  those  principles  of  our  foreign  policy  which  time  and  authority  have 
lanctified,  does  follow  the  precise  language  of  one  of  the  most  celebrated  of  the 


%. 


15 


no 


state  papers  of  Mr.  Monroe.   But  let  that  pass.  The  question  is,  whether  the  United 
States  are  involved  in  any  dilemma  which  human  forecas:  could  have  prevented. 

Mr.  Fox  demands  the  immediate  release  ol'  McLnod;  to  this  Mr.  Webster  replies 
that  that  it  Is  impossible  ;  McLeod  is  in  the  hands  of  the  law,  and  by  that  law  only 
can  he  be  discharged.     It  is  not  for  the  United  States  to  loose  his  bonds  by  any  sum- 
mary interposition  on  their  part.     His  arrest,  imprisonment,  and  trial,  must  take 
their  course  in  thi'  courts  of  the  State  of  New  York  or  (in  certain  contingencies)  of 
the  United   States.     The   United  S'  jtes  are  a  Government  of  constitutional  and 
limited  power  ;  and  it  is  perfectly  well  understood  at  the   present  day,  as  a  point 
of  international  law,  that  constitutional  governments  cannot  and  will  not  interpose, 
arbitrarily  to  change  the  course   of  inunicifial  Justice,  for  the  satisfaction  of  any 
grievance,  real  or  supposed,  of  a  foreign  Power.     This  principle  has  been  recog- 
nised by  England  herself,  in  a  most  celebrated  case.     In  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne 
the  Czar  Peter,  of  Muscovy,  being  aggrieved  by  an  injury  done  in  England  to  his 
ambassador,  Andrew  Alattueof,  sent  to  demand  redress,  and  this  in  the  peremptory 
form  of  a  threat  of  instant  war  if  that  redress  were  not  granted.     But  the  Queen's 
Government  most  nobly  replied  that  she  could  not  grant  the  redress  demanded,  be- 
cause it  involved  a  violation  of  the  law  of  the  land  ;  and  that  she  could  do  nothing 
implicating  the  rights,  though  it  were  of  the  meanest  of  her  subjects,  unless  warrant- 
ed by  the  law  of  the  land.     The  GoveriinitMit  of  England  was  one  of  constitution 
and  of  laws,  not  of  arbitrary  powers.     To  the  same  effect,  and   with  still  greater 
reason,  does  the  Government  of  the  United  States  say,  in  the  present  case,  that  we 
cannot  lawfully,  and  therefore,  even  if  otherwise  disposed,  we  will  not,  undertake 
by  arbitrary  interference  to  arrest  the  constitutional  action  of  the  laws  in  the  State 
of  New  York.     For  if  Queen  Anne  was  bound  by  the  law  of  the  land,  how  much 
more  strictly  is  not  the  President  of  the   United  Stales  restrained  within  the  limits 
of  the  Federal  Constitution  ? 

But  in  certain  contingencies  the  Federal  Government  does  contemplate  the  libe- 
ration of  McLeod  as  a  thing  to  happen  in  the  course  of  law.     He  may  be  tried  by 
a  jury  and  found  not  guilty  of  participation  in  the  attack  on  the  Caroline.     That  is 
one  possibility,  and    the   gentleman   from   Pennsylvania  is  altogether  too  quick  to 
decide  that  question   upon  his  own  imperfect  knowledge  of  the  facts.     Sir  Allan 
McNab,  for    instance,  swears  positively  ihat  McLeod  was   not   present.     Then  a 
jury,  though  it  should  find  him  to  have  been  present  in  the  attack,  yet  may  give 
him  the  benefit  of  his  plea  in  justification,  as  happened  in  the  great  revolutionary 
case  of  Preston's  trial  in  Boston.     Or  the  Supreme  Court  of  New  York  may  admit 
the  force  of  that  plea  in  this  preliminary  stage  of  the  trial.     Or  the  case  may  find 
its  way   into  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and  thus  be  decided  within 
this  Capitol.     Meanwhile,  (here   is  anotiier  view  of  this  question  which  seems  to 
have  escaped  the  notice  of  gentlemen,  but  which,  after  all,  if  regarded  for  a  mo- 
ment, and  compared  with  the  other  views  of  the  case,  relieves  the  point  of  interna- 
tional law  from  all  the  confusion  and  obscurity  in  which  it  is  now  enveloped.    The 
Federal  Government  looks  to  the  possible  event  of  the  liberation  of  McLeod  by 
some  lawful  act  of  its  own,  in  the  discharge  of  its  public  duty  to  the  whole  United 
States,  of  whose  peace  and  honor  it  is  the  guardian.     That  contingency  presupposes 
sundry  conditions.     It  presupposes  that  the  attack  on  the  Caroline  was  either  pre- 
viously commanded  or  subsequently  assumed  by  the  British  Government  as  a  national 
act.     It  presunposes  that  that  attack,  thus  commanded  or  assumed,  constitutes  an 
act  of  war;  not,  as  some  gentlemen  have  superficially  contended,  that  it  was  war 
itself;  involving  the  absurdity  of  the  two  nations  having  been  from  that  day  to  this 
in  a  state  of  war;  but  that  it  was,  as  I  have  said,  an  act  of  war — of  insolemn  or 
imperfect  war,  as  the  books  call  it ;  yet  involving  national  responsibility  for  the  act 
itself  and  all  its  consequences ;  just  as  in  the  case  of  some  isolated  act  of  reprisals 
or  retorsion,  which  our  own  Government  might  order.     It  presupposes  that,  in  such 
a  case,  a  nation  which  is  aggrieved  by  the  military  attack  of  another  nation  is  not 
justified  by  the  custom  of  nations,  or  by  common  sense,  in  seizing  upon  a  private 
foldier  engaged  in  the  attack,  and  extorting  vengeance  from  his  poor  person,  for 


I 


.; 


16 

wlifit  lie  did  under  ll  ;  onlors  (if  his  Goveiniiu'iit  ;  wliirit  orders  bound  hini  iinpera- 
tivi'ly  ;  in  disobeying  which  hf  might  be  lifld  lo  the  penalties  of  ireasoii,  and  in 
obeying  which  he  whs  the  mere  insiriimeni  nf  that  Governniml. 

Are  these  pr»  niises  f.ilse  in  fact  or  in  l.nv  ]  If  jjiMitlenM-n  deny  tluMit,  lo  do  so  is 
to  fall  inevitably  into  this  conclusion  :  that  the  United  Slates  have  no  « laini  en  the 
English  Government  for  redress,  in  llie  ni:iucr  of  the  Caroline.  If  that  was  a  na- 
tional art,  you  must  look  lor  redress  on  account  of  it  lo  national  responsibility.  If 
you  are  of  opinion  that  you  have  no  rl.iinj  in  this  ninlter,  us  aoainst  ihe  Brilisli  Go- 
vernment, then  you  may,  if  you  cIjoosi-,  deal  with  the  individuals  engiif^ed  in  it,  as 
su(h,  as  fast  as  you  ^ei  them  into  your  power.  This  was  the  coursi-  wiiich  Eng- 
land pursued  in  ihe  case  of  such  of  our  citizens  as  she  apprehended  in  arms  in  Up- 
per Canada  ;  and  in  doinc  uhich  she  ndinquished  all  rii;ht  of  recourse  to  us  as  a 
nation.  \nd  in  precisely  the  same  proportion  that  you  magnify  McLeod,and  ni«ke 
him  ihe  object  of  national  pursuit,  in  liie  same  proportiiui  do  30U  diminish  iho 
strength  of  our  causc>  in  the  matter  of  the  Carolino.  These  two  cases  are  situated 
at  iIk!  opposite  ends  of  a  lever,  and  as  you  raise  the  one  you  depress  the  other. 
And  1  once  again  entreat  penilernen,  on  all  sides  of  the  House,  not  lo  be  misled  in 
this  way,  to  the  prejudice  of  the  public  honor  and  the  sacrifice  of  the  rights  of  the 
United  rotates. 

There  is  one  set  of  supposable  facts,  and  but  one,  to  which  the  views  of  the  Op- 
position, and  tlie  legal  authorities  on  which  ihey  rely,  are  applicable.  They  cite 
a  passage  fiom  Vaitvl,  which  seems  at  first  blu>h  to  countenance  their  >  iews,  and  to 
contradict  those  of  the  Secretary.  In  the  ciialion  of  this  passage,  lliey  wrest  it  from 
the  context,  and  thus  fall  into  an  erroneous  consiruclion  of  its  meaning.  And  diey 
read  it  in  a  translaiion  which  in  this  place,  as  my  friend  fron»  Michigan  (Mr.  How- 
ard) was  good  enou'^h  lo  susjgesi  10  me,  docs  not  truly  iepies(Mit  ihe  import  ol  ihe 
origuirtl,  which  orij;im|  unequivocally  su>tains  ihe  views  o\'  ihe  St  criiaiy.  For  it 
applies  not  lo  ihe  case  of  an  act  jierformed  by  a  sohlicr  in  obedience  to  the  uders 
of  ids  s'jperiiir  officer,  and  the  commind  of  ids  Government,  but  Ic  some  act  of  in- 
dividual responsibility  in  its  own  nature,  ll  i'!;iy  be,  for  instance,  hat  McLeod,  if 
he  killed  Durfee,  did  so  from  private  malice,  aod  if  so,  he  is  cleaily  resoon>ihle  io 
the  laws  of  JNevv  York  for  the  act  ;  and  if  Im;  did  so,  i  cannm  [)ut  think  il  at  ihu 
EngliTih  Government,  inst(>ad  of  miderlakinj:  to  protect  him,  woidd  be  ohd  to  see 
him  punished,  and  the  rather  d  he  should  have  sought  lo  efiVct  purposes  of  private 
malice,  under  ilie  cover  of  i^imulaled  obedience  lo  ihe  orders  ol  his  Guvernment.  It 
may  be  that  those  orders  did  not  coverlids  fact. 

The  genlleman  from  Penns)  Ivania  is  too  hasty  in  jumpinf;  al  conclusions  before 
the  premises  are  ascertained,  ll  does  not  follow,  as  he  argiifs,  that  if  the  St.'premn 
Court  of  l\ew  York  should  decide  lo  remand  McLeod  for  trial,  ihat  decision  would 
of  necessii}  involve  the  Federal  Government  in  any  tiilemnia.  it  may  l)e  that  a 
full  liial  al  bar  would  prove  to  be  necf'ssary  in  order  to  as  Hrn.in  wiieiher  in  point 
ol"  fact  ihis  be  a  case  of  individual  or  national  responsibdii}'.  1  do  noi  say  it  is  so, 
but  I  suggest  it  as  what  may  l)e,  and  as  presenting  a  conlini;ency  concerning  which 
the  United  States  have  not  pronounced. 

1  will  not  detain  lite  House  with  any  further  discussion  of  these  questions.  This 
only  I  add  in  conclusion,  thai  if  all  or  either  of  the  points  in  controversy  between 
us  and  Great  Britain  shoidd  end  in  war,  I  count  with  implicit  confidence  upon  the 
pairiotisni  of  tin;  Government  in  all  its  parts,  of  both  Houses  of  Congres>,  and  evi  ry 
niend)er  of  it,  and  on  that  of  the  whole  People  of  the  United  States,  lo  unite  in  car- 
rying us  trium|)hanily  through  it,  10  rally  as  on»}  ntan  under  the  broad  banner  of  ihe 
Union,  and  never  to  yield  uiilil  the  entire  con'.inent  is  redeemed  from  foreign  fiower 
and  foreign  influence,  and  Republican  Governnunt  shall  be  made  to  become  the 
common  blessing  of  tha  whole  of  North  America,  from  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  to  the 
furthest  shoreii  of  liie  Arctic  Sea. 


,\  .;  lU 


^^4; 


»  I 

t 

:> 


